Originally Posted by Mike Up
I've found the Pioneer recording to be clones of the original. Quality wise, you can't do better than a clone. You can process the crap out of it, but quality is measured by creating without adding material that wasn't there originally.
Exactly Mike UP. Based on the copies of S-VHS tapes I've made, I couldn't see how the ES10 could be "far superior", and I haven't been able to get my hands on an ES10 to do the same test HG did. And then it occurred to me, the best test is to compare the S-VHS tape with the DVD copy, and it's just like you said - they are clones. In fact, so much so, that I honestly make mistakes telling the original from the copy on a 60" LCD projector TV. Of course, I took the time to adjust the proc amp for the best results. There is absolutely no blotchiness as some have reported. The only difference I see in the copy is a wee bit more noise in the shadow areas, which is to expected from the final D/A conversion to the TV. A DirecTV copy was also very good, but not as impressive as the S-VHS copy, and I did have to spend more time tweaking the proc amp for this input to get it to look like the original. But you only have to calibrate it once, and you're all set. In some regards, the copies are actually more watchable than the originals, because you can adjust gamma, white and black levels, etc. before burning the copy.
The reason I was concerned about HG's test results is I have about 100 S-VHS tapes I want to archive to DVD, so I'm going to have to spend considerable time burning copies, and I want them to be as good as they can so I don' t have to redo them later. But what could be better than a clone?